NOT
FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
Appeal
from the Circuit Court for Putnam County, Howard O. McGillin,
Jr., Judge.
David
Maldonado, of The Maldonado Law Firm, P.A., Lakeland, for
Appellant.
Ashley
Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kristen L.
Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for
Appellee.
PER
CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
ORFINGER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
LAMBERT, J., concurring, in part, and dissenting, in part.
Pursuant
to a plea agreement, William Charles Ketela, Jr., was
adjudicated guilty of being a principal to the manufacture of
methamphetamine and was sentenced by the trial court to serve
eighteen months in prison, with appropriate jail credit
awarded. Ketela appealed, and in the instant appeal, his
court-appointed counsel filed what is commonly referred to as
an Anders[1] Brief, representing to this court that
after a careful review of the record on appeal and the
relevant statutes and case law, he could find no meritorious
argument to warrant reversal. I concur with affirming the
judgment and sentence imposed, albeit with one exception.
During the plea colloquy, the trial court advised Ketela as
follows:
The court is required to assess certain fees and
costs as part of the sentence, including $100 cost of
investigation. If you wish to, you can have a hearing on
whether that $100 amount is correct or you can accept the
$100 amount. Do you want to waive the hearing and have me
adjudicate the $100 cost of investigation amount?
Ketela
agreed to "accept" the $100 charge, and the trial
court imposed the $100 investigative costs against Ketela and
in favor of the Putnam County Sheriff's Office.
The
trial court was incorrect when it stated that it was
required to impose a $100 costs of investigation
charge. While under section 938.27(8), Florida Statutes
(2018), the court must impose a minimum $100 assessment
against a defendant for the costs of prosecution for a felony
offense, no similar $100 minimum investigative costs charge
exists under this statute. Instead, the statute reads, in
pertinent part:
(1) In all criminal and violation-of-probation or
community-control cases, convicted persons are liable for
payment of the costs . . . including investigative costs
incurred by law enforcement agencies, by fire departments for
arson investigations, and by investigations of the Department
of Financial Services or the Office of Financial ...